emily miller, author of the series, "emily gets her gun,." "washington journal" is next. [captions copyright nationalcable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed bynational captioning institute] host: 30 minutes this morning to go through the newspapers on "washington journal low score before we turn our attention to guns in america. so anything you wish to discuss, please call in. 585-3 881 for republicans, 58 5- 3880 for democrats. 585-3882 for independence. make a comment on our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan.

and you can go to c-span.org. here is the front page of "usa today," a new poll out, and here are the results. the headline, "obama supported on guns, debt." when it comes to the federal deficit, 45% of americans support his approach to the deficit, 38% support republicans. when it comes to guns, it is 45% for president obama, 39% for congressional republicans. for climate change, 47% for the government, 26% for congressional republicans. inside "the washington times," "graham puts drone toll at 4700

kills worldwide." some -- "it was the first time any government official had referred to a death toll in the drone strikes as us officials have refused to discuss publicly details of the campaign against al qaeda terrorists in pakistan, yemen, and elsewhere through but senator lindsey graham, south carolina republican and a staunch supporter of the raids cited a number that exceeded estimates. we have killed 4700, mr. graham was quoted as saying by the easily patch. right below that in "the washington times," "ex-senator admits to siring love child in the 1970's. former senator pete domenici

disclosed he fired me -- he fathered a super child with a 24-year-old daughter of one of his senate colleagues, eight startling revelation for a politician with a reputation as an upstanding family man. identify their son as nevada lawyer adam paul laxalt. they said they decided to go public because they thought someone was about to root -- to release the information in an attempt to smear mr. domenici. "i deeply regret my behavior, and i hope new mexicans will view my compliments outweigh my personal transgression." mr. domenici was the longest-serving senator in new mexico history when he required -- when he retired in january, 2009, after six terms. he was known for his unflagging

support of the states national laboratories and military installations and became a powerbroker for his work on the federal budget and energy policy. mr. domenici voted for the impeachment of president clinton in 1998 after his affair with monica lewinsky, but his floor statement focused on the fact that mr. clinton had lied under oath, noting that the trial has never been about the president's private sex acts as tawdry as they have been. but in the same speech, he cited the value of truthfulness and how it is the first pillar ." good character er yuriko esther domenici and his wife have been married for when it 50 years and had eight children. paul laxalt is 90 years old and had no comment. the front page of "the washington times" this morning.

"gop is resisting obama rusher on tax increase." host: that is the front-page lead,, and at the end of the story is this. "the senate next week will consider competing democratic and republican proposals to stop the automatic cuts. the democratic plan would institute a 30% minimum tax rate on incomes over $1 million, cut farm subsidies and institute

military cuts delayed until most us troops have returned from afghanistan. neither plan is expected to win the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. instead, attention will shift to the next deadline, arch 27, when financing for the government runs out. the house bill would retain financing at pre-sequester levels, one $.043 trillion -- $ 1.0 43 trillion. senate democratic leaders have yet to decide whether they will go along or force another showdown on the automatic cuts with the government shutdown in the balance. but aides warned they will only do that if public opinion shifts overwhelmingly to their side. so far they say the public may

say it sides with democrats, but there is little indication voters feel passionately enough to remove -- to move republicans from their trenches. that is the "new york times" story. 25 minutes left before we turn attention to guns in america. any public policy issue you would like to discuss, we begin with monica in homestead, florida, a republican. caller: good morning. i would like to start out by saying, hopefully the situation with jesse jackson junior and his wife will be straightened out. we need to be mindful of our congressmen and people in politics to make sure that they are taking care of -- number two, i would like to make a comment that we need to make sure that we are -- our

congress, rather, is paying attention to what is about to take place with the automatic spending cuts, and we need to make sure the military is secure and not to cut too much of the military. host: that is monica in homestead. larry in hernando, mississippi, a democrat. seco last night, -- caller: last night we heard about getting out of her recession. these republicans are going to destroy the tax base, so we will be in a mess. i am a 56-year-old army veteran , and i think we are going back to the wild west. only police officers should be able to carry weapons.

if you are going hunting, you should have to call the state and say you are going hunting. otherwise, we are definitely going back to the wild, wild west. host: have you ever owned a gun privately? caller: i own guns now. host: do you think you should have to call the police now? caller: know, if you are at home, -- no, if you are at home, you should not have to call the police if you're using them for protection. iq. have a nice day. host: frank is in tulsa, oklahoma, and independent. frank, you are on the "washington journal." caller: thanks for taking my call. i want to point out that when george washington was elected and during his inauguration,

they suspended the proceedings and went to a little chapel there in new york called st. paul's chapel, and there he dedicated this nation to god and warns that if america ever turned its back on god, that god would lift his hand of protection and prosperity. well, where the world trade center sat, that is where, st. paul's chapel owned all that land. that is where the judgment of god on this nation began as a warning, and we have continued to disregard that warning. the judgment is kind of because we have slaughtered 50 million babies. yeah, we complain about children being killed and we want to change laws that do not pertain to things that are really driving the killers, such as

these videogames and removing christ from school, and then they want to go back to the schools to pray after the shootings, which is just -- it is also crazy -- it is all so crazy. host: what type of work do you do in tulsa? caller: i am a disabled veteran, for about 10 years now. host: prior to that? caller: i was a tree surgeon. host: can you define what that is? caller: a person who cares for trees, diseases, structure, cultivation, in the urban landscape particularly. host: thank you, sir. from "the chicago sun-times," "the harder they fall." here is "the chicago tribune." "

jacksons guilty trail of excess." jesse jackson junior pleads guilty. "i lived off my campaign." "jesse jackson junior pleaded guilty wednesday to one felony fraud count in connection with his connection of use of 700 $50,000 in campaign money to pay for living expenses and by items like -- of 750,000 dollars in campaign money to pay for living expenses. the federal judge overseeing the case number robert wilkins, is said to sentence him. "for years i lived off my campaign," mr. jackson, 47, said in response to questions from the judge about the play. at one point he was crying and

proceedings were stop so he could be given a tissue. "guilty, your honor -- i misled the american people," mr. jackson said when asked what he would come -- except the plea deal. his wife, sandy, also accompanied him, and later in the day she pleaded guilty to a charge that she filed false income tax statements during the time that mr. jackson was dipping into his campaign treasury. prosecutors said they would seek to have her sentenced to 18 to 24 months. on at least two instances, mr. jackson and his wife used campaign money and build a bear workshop, a store where patrons can create stuffed animals. from december 2007 through december 2008 a spent $313 $.89 -- $313.89. one of the more exotic items they bought was an elk head from

a taxidermist in montana. according to the documents, mr. jackson arranged in march 2011 taft $7,000 paid to the taxidermist with much of the money coming from a campaign account, and it was shipped a month later to mr. jackson's congressional office. a year later, his wife, knowing it had been bought with campaign money, had it moved from washington to chicago and a congressional staff member to sell it. in august 2012, the staff member sold the ok for $5,300 to an interior designer who is actually an undercover fbi employee who was investigating the jackson's. documents released friday showed how mr. jackson used his campaign money to buy items like fur capes, celebrity memorabilia, and expensive furniture." x call during this short session of open -- the next call during this short section of open phones comes from ralph peer and

what is on your mind? caller: the world is running out of oil, and that is why we are discovering more year and prices keep going up. the technology developed in the 1960's, called liquid petroleum reactor. it was used for weapons, but that reactor cannot meltdown. it is liquid already. it runs at ambient pressure so it cannot explode. if he gets out, it automatically solidifies. it cannot produce -- it produces one/100 of a percent of -- of what is used to burn up existing material. it is so simple to the entire it -- it is so simple compared to the inherent dangers of the reactors now. it costs one percent of cost.

we have the most advanced nuclear industry in the world and we are doing nothing. imagine china with its cheap labor and one half the energy cost. there is no way we can compete with it. we need to wake up, we need a .ath grea it host: justin in murfreesboro. caller: that was very interesting, but the gentleman who just spoke is making very good points there is something -- it is interesting to me, we are sitting here talking about jesse jackson's son, $750,000. this is small beans. i really wish we would be talking about all the corruption in washington right now.

i mean, just for instance, the frontliners doing a great work undercut -- uncovering a lot of this stuff. it seems it is not getting a lot of mainstream media play. the concern i have, i am sitting here watching -- excuse me -- i am sitting here watching as all these other countries are -- especially egypt, a perfect example -- is fighting to have a constitution. corruption is unfolding, being downplayed or at least not covered to the extent that we need to. but at the same time, the rights that myself and most of my comrades fought for or thought we were fighting for, are actually on the chopping block along with strength of the citizenry, and it seems

to me that if we are so concerned about the privacy and taking away privacy from citizens, we need to start looking at the people who have so much power that they can, with their corruption, destroy .ur entire country grea host: from the washington times, "the biggest losers." "the pentagon estimates the states will lose a total of $ 4.8 billion in workers salaries when its civilian employees are laid off or forced to take unpaid time off because of budget constraints. california, $62,500. maryland, $45,700. this is the lost of wages -- the loss of wages for each of those states. california, $419 million, etc.

sandra, good morning, you are on "washington journal." caller caller: good morning. we all had better go out and billson there's -- and build some bears. we are not getting anything to help us in any way. but on top of that, we should all have girlfriends on the side, and washington is going to hell in a handbasket. when are they going to grow up and be men and women, decent human beings, and do something right for this world? shame on you. host: do you think washington is any different now than it has been in the past? caller: i think we are wide open to what they are doing. this has evidently gone on for

a long time and they can get away with anything they want. why? they can't. we can't. can you? you break the law, you go to jail. you do don't -- you don't take care of your family right, you go to jail. you become a loser and you can't turn around and say that one there is doing it so why can't i. so sorry, this happened in the past. grow up. host: jim is in bay city, michigan. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to talk about this gas prices at four dollars per gallon. we have a president that all he talks about is solar and wind mills and stuff like that. it is ridiculous. we have oil up to our ears hear in this country, and environmentalists are the only thing stopping refineries and anything that makes it all.

i wish they would go back to their caves where they belong. host: from "wall street journal," "florida governor supports broader medicaid," saying he wants the state to expand medicaid under the federal health law, taking him the seventh gop governor to back expansion of medicaid, along with michigan governor rick snyder and ohio governor john kasich. mr. scott said that he supports a three-year expansion as long as the federal government agrees to keep its commitment to pay 100% of the cost during this time. he called a compassionate, commonsense step forward. president obama's original 2010 health law called for the us to pay 100% of the cost for three

years." that is in "wall street journal." as is this. health insurance plans that cover tens of millions of americans will have to pay for mental health and substance abuse treatment starting next year under federal rules. the obama administration finalize them on wednesday. the 2010 affordable care act requires health cancer individuals -- healthcare plans for individuals and small businesses -- many of the specifics of what is required in those categories will be left to states to decide. insurers and some business groups have argued that mandating such coverage would make policies too expensive, and they have lobbied the federal government to scale back the scope of what needs to be covered." x call comes from bob in bethlehem, pennsylvania, a democrat. what is the public policy on your mind this morning? caller: thank you for taking my

call. i was looking at tv this morning, and they were saying 30 million people are going to be hit with this snowstorm. now, already up there in new england, they have about a foot and a half to two feet of snow already on the ground. when they plow the street, it forced the snow over at the sewer. if they would use fire equipment or water trucks, and water at the sewer and blast the water so that there is an opening so the water can run down the sewer -- if you are on a hill, hit it at a 45 degree angle so the water when it is coming down the hill goes right down into the sewer, thus preventing water from sitting on the roads and

freezing at night and causing accidents. and in the process, it may save lives, and also people do drown when you get high water like that. so it could save lives that way. host: that was bob in bethlehem, pennsylvania. as his dark cell in leland, north carolina, the independent line. caller: my concern is with the jackson family in illinois. i have lots of family in the chicagoland area. i believe a lot of the problems with jesse jackson junior happened with barack obama's seat being vacated. i believe if the family or the candidate himself, jesse jackson jr., just would have announced that he was interested in this seat, it would not have the appearance of any backdoor dealing.

i think a lot of these concerns , at least being honest about wanting that senate seat. with the governor having issues at that time, mccoy of this, if it was just announced that i want the seat and letting his constituents know about it -- it is unfortunate what happened with the family, but it did a lot of good, and it started with his father campaigning in 1984, in 1988, for his interest of being the president of the united states. that is my concern. thank you so much. host: from marysville, tennessee, good morning. caller: hello there, how are you? host: good. caller: i am a retired coal miner from kentucky, and i lived down here in knoxville, tennessee. what i can't understand, why the government -- they talk about

stuff and they do not try to help people. they pass laws to hurt people. the company that i worked for, peabody, they are filing chapter 11 and trying to put me out of my insurance card, my pension, everything. i am fighting for it. last year they gave every one of their executives $6 million bonus apiece. they have the money to pay our insurance and stuff, they just refuse to do it, and they are shipping coal to russia and china. i can understand why the government puts up with this stuff like this, let's this stuff go on. they keep passing laws like that trying to help people. they have not helped people since the reagan administration. have gone downhill ever since. ever since he did away with airline controllers, everything has gone downhill. it is just like coal. all your coal moves out to the

east coast, north, and the only reason we are talking about coal is because coal is coming down from the unit -- coal is coming down to the united states from canada. host: front page of "the washington post," "the fed is unlikely to pull stimulus plug soon." "stocks on wednesday tumbled on concerns after a recent meeting growing debate about the initiative with the federal bank, but is the prevailing sentiment at the fed on recent remarks that the central bank's efforts putting tens of billions of dollars into the economy every month should not end anytime soon." right next to that on the front page, "china has hacked most of washington."

"this is the usual answer, a list of those hacked in recent years include law firms, human rights groups, contractors, and national offices, federal agencies. the information copper mines by such in truth and would be enough -- the information compromised by such intrusions -- the only question is whether the chinese have the analytical resources to sort through the massive troves of data they steal every day. the dark secret is that there is no such thing as a secure network." law firms, think tanks, newspapers, if there is something of interest, you should assume you've been penetrated." by the way, this week and on

the communicators program, which airs saturdays at 6:30 p.m., michael daniel, the president of cybersecurity coordinators. he will be the guest on "the communicators" on c-span. a couple more articles i want to show you. this right here, the photo of senator rubio meeting with the minister -- with israeli president shimon peres. senator marco rubio met wednesday with the leaders of israel as part of a swing through the middle east. the florida republicans sought to burnish his foreign policy resume. that is in "the washington times." a couple of articles from the internet, from politico, the hill, other sources. this is from "the hollywood reporter." "bill o'reilly signs to write

killing jesus." the book will be out september 24. another book that is coming out is another book by ron paul. ron paul's new manifesto, from politico, "former presidential candidate ron paul, a longtime foe of the fed and champion of smaller foreign-policy footprints, is turning to education in a new book slated to release this fall. in "new school manifesto," he will vote homeschooling and free-market principles applied to education, according to unofficial book description the co--- book description." and "mitt romney to speak at sea pack -- at cpac 2013."

finally, ashley judd meets with thedscc and kentucky donors on a potential senate bid. she is moving closer to a challenge to senator mitch mcconnell, meeting in recent days with the democratic senatorial campaign committee to discuss a potential run. burton in arlington, texas, go ahead with what is on your mind this morning. caller: good morning. with all the contingency planning about sequester, all the cutbacks and the damage it will do to all of our citizenry, i'm concerned that i have yet to hear anything about cutting back on foreign aid and other money that we pay out in

massive sums to other countries around the world. i would like to hear a little bit about that from our politicians. host: thank you for calling in from arlington, texas. finally, jim tweets in -- "these cuts need to go into effect but should not be handed down by the budget office because obama will do his best to cause maximum pain ergo well, it is seven o'clock 30 -- maximum pain." well, it is 7:30, and we will be talking about guns in america. alan berlow of the center for public integrity will talk about the department of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. we will be going live to a gun

store in chantilly, featuring interviews with staffers looking at some of the guns that are sold there, their views of patrons, etc. you can see inside the gum shop there in virginia. we will also -- the gun shop there in virginia. we will also be talking with larry pratt of the gun owners of america, and with emily miller of "the washington times." she has written a series called "emily gets her gun," and we will be talking about the products sold at the blue ridge arsenal in chantilly, virginia. >> from the start, we told the board that the approach we were going to take was pretty straightforward, and remember,

we were sent there to sort of fix gm, the board and i. that was the mission, go make this thing a viable company again. so we were all focused, and brought the message we are going to design, build, and sell the world's best vehicles. we are going to move quickly, we need your support, and we need your input, and so we changed a few things about the board meeting. we shorten them considerably. we stayed away from the details or did not get in the weeds on how you build a car, but the bigger questions of financing, more outcome a positioning, marketing, that sort of thing. the board was supportive of that, and we kept them informed. you know, we just took off. >> leading general motors through bankruptcy and the government bailout, former chairman and ceo ed whitaker on "american turnaround," sunday night at nine o'clock on

"booktv." like us on facebook. "washington journal" continues. host: on your screen is the inside of the blue ridge arsenal and gun shop and range -- is the arsenal of the gun shop and range in chantilly, virginia. some of the services they offer and the items they sell, and we will get your views on gun ownership in america. but first, alan berlow, a contributed to the center for public integrity, and what he contributed recently was this study. "current dongun debate may not help the beleaguered atf agency crippled by weak laws, paltry budgets, and congressional restrictions."

you said if you want an agency to be small and ineffective at what it does, the atf is the model. guest: right, and the reason we say that and mr. spitzer says that, you can think about this in two ways. the atf is limited both in terms of its budget and staffing, and in terms of its investigatory authority. so we can go into details, the specifics of each of those, but to address the budgetary implications of this, the atf is currently operating on a budget of about $ 1.15 billion. it has effectively the same number of agents to investigate gun crimes, 2500, as it did 40 years ago. the size of the atf special agent staff, 2500 agents, is about the same size as the harris county, texas, sheriffs department.

harris county is one county. the atf has to deal with 50 states. atf is a regulatory agency that operates the licensed gun dealers, deals with manufacturers, and it also has a mandate to do with explosives, deals with terrorism, bombings, that sort of thing. but with gun dealers, effectively you have 300 full- time agents to examine the records of 60,000 licensed firearms dealers. that gives you an idea of the scale of the operation, both in terms of the money and the manpower. it is a very small agency. if you want to compare it, for example, to the fbi, the fbi's staff has pretty much increased by 2/3 in the same 48 -- in the same 40-year period.

host: back to your report. you write that the success of atf's critics, reining in its authority, is nowhere more evident than in the bureau's appropriations stat sheet, a two-page document that devotes 11 lines to describing the agency's budget and the remaining 79 lines to prescriptions or prohibitions on its power. guest: well, the prescriptions, the prohibitions on what atf can do, are legion, and they are not only contained in the appropriation, they are contained in many laws that congress has passed. we look at the specific riders to the appropriations. one example, there is a prescription on retention of records. the government is not allowed to retain records of who purchased firearms. there is no centralized database of firearms.

host: is that the tr rule? guest: part of it is. some of those have been repealed, but three still remain. they restrict the government. the one i was going to reject -- the one i was going to address was something called the 24-hour rule. if you purchase a firearm, you have to fill out a form, the fbi runs a background check, and assuming you're not a convicted felon, if you are not an illegal alien or involved in domestic abuse, there are a number of prescriptions on purchasing firearms in this country. but assuming you are a lawful gun buyer, you can run this background check or it it takes a couple of minutes, and you walk out in most states with a gun the same day. so the fbi maintains its record, but it only maintains it for 24

hours. the implications of that are several. one is that several thousand times a year the system messes up. about 3000 felons are allowed to purchase firearms. that means the atf, if they figure that out, the 2000 are the ones they do figure out. we don't know how many people are undetected by the system. the civil fact is, they slip through the system and the atf has to go out and recover those firearms. but the 24-hour rule is important also in terms of trafficking. a gun trafficker who wants to purchase five or 15 or 50 or 150 firearms can go into a gun store and make a purchase of those weapons, and assuming he does that, you can sell those on the streets of new york city at a substantial profit.

as a trafficker, i would not make that purchase myself. i would go in and send in a straw buyer to make that purchase. that straw buyer is a person who doesn't have a criminal record, is not prohibited from making those purchases. now, you would think, ok, he is going to go in and purchase five weapons, but he would not do that because if you purchased five the dealer would have to file in multiple sales report, and that is a tipoff to the atf that trafficking is going to take place. so instead of purchasing five from one dealer or 50 from when dealer, if he goes to one dealer and purchases one and another dealer and purchases another until he accumulates his arsenal, to drive up to 95 and cell in the city -- you think, why doesn't the fbi crosscheck those purchases? if they know multiple purchases are an indication of

crosschecking -- an indication of trafficking, why don't they crosscheck? they cannot crosscheck. the government is prohibited from crosschecking, from connecting the dots. if you are conducting a criminal investigation and you want to connect the dots and the tr amendment prohibits the government from doing that. host: reading through your report, is it correct to assume that one of your conclusions is that the current weakness in the atf benefits groups like the nra? or the nra is in favor of the current structure of the atf? guest: well, the nra wrote the amendment. it benefits them in terms that these are things that it advocates. it is very successful and it puts out press releases

boasting about its success and maintaining these evanescent -- maintaining these investments. far be it from me for standing in their face, but their claim is this is a protection of the individual right to privacy, that the government doesn't have the right to know who owns a firearm or what type. there is a 1930 or four national firearms act which regulates the sale -- there is a 1934 national firearms act that regulates the sale of machine guns. that law allows people to own machine guns, but they have to undergo a very extensive background fbi check. they are fingerprinted, photographed. in addition to that, they have to undergo approval by a local police department or sheriff. they want to know that you are not out there, that you are not

a wife beater or that you are not involved in a brawl in a bar on a daily basis, and if you are, they have the authority to say you are not entitled to own a machine gun, you are not a responsible enough citizen to do that. so there is this registration that has been out there since 1934. it is very serious, very extensive, and most interesting about it, there is virtually no objection to it from the people who have to register their firearms. so the argument that the nra frequently makes, which is that virtually any kind of gun control is going to lead to registration -- we already have it, and nobody objects to it. host: alan berlow is our guest, a contributor for the center for public integrity. his study is on the alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives euro. we have 15 or 20 minutes to take calls on his study on the atf.

we set our fourth line up part this morning for gun owners. we would like to make sure to get your views, and we will be live from the blue ridge arsenal later in the program, talking with the owners and staffers out there, seeing some of the products. we will spend two hours at the blue ridge arsenal this morning. we begin with a call from gary in sterling, virginia, on our republican line. you are on the "washington journal." guest \ callercaller: i would like tok about the .223 bullet, which is larger than the .22. when it hits something, or it explodes. it was approved by the geneva

convention people because the department of defense would not put that weapon in their arsenal because they thought it was so lethal. as soon as it hits something, it loses total trajectory all -- ?ost: what is your question > what is your point? caller: that this bullet should be outlawed. host: does your report deal with ammunition? guest: no. host: does the atf deal with ammunition? guest: the atf does deal with ammunition. there are limitations on those bullets already, but it is still possible to own them and to sell them. they are trying to tighten that up here it -- they are trying to tighten that up. host: in your report, are you

making recommendations to straighten up the atf? guest: essentially we are interested in looking at here you have the full federal gun agency that is responsible for enforcing our firearms laws. the question being, do you want this to be an effective agency or not? it seems pretty clear there are a lot of constraints on the atf that make it less effective than it might otherwise be. host: could the president create a bureau of firearms? could he change the atf structure and get rid of the alcohol and tobacco parts? guest: the atf has gone under a number of changes the last few years. since its founding in 1971, he was part of the treasury department. it was then part of the internal revenue service. i think he was briefly part of

the fbi. i am not sure of that, but in any event, it moved from treasury to the justice department after nine/11 -- after 9/11. the president, doing it on his own, i think not. i think it would require legislation to do that. host: mr. berlow, in your report, did you look at inspections? in so, how often would a place like the blue ridge arsenal be inspected by atf? guest: as i said, there are about 60,000 dealers. the atf tries to inspect dealers once every five years. many dealers can go as long as eight years without eating inspected. some are not inspected for even longer than that. the atf tries to focus on dealers where it thinks there might be a problem.

it has to set certain priorities, but typically the rule of thumb is about once every five years. host: next call for alan berlow comes from esau, wichita, kansas. caller: good morning. thank you for being on this morning. one of the things that has always occurred to me is alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives seems like a strange organization. it would make much more sense if we had a bureau of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana, and those are things that we regulated one way, and guns were taken on with a different irony and a different organization that -- with a different priority and the different organization focus purely and totally on guns. we all know it is not the gun shows where most of this stuff happens, it is people selling guns to their neighbor or their house gets broken into. with the technology we have with guns, you could actually have

trade-in programs where people traded their own -- their old guns for only guns that fired with the genetic coding that the gun owner could fire the gun. why are we not making changes like this? last but not least, you made a good point that the gun industry and the nra are the people who are lobbying, the people supposed to be monitoring. it is something that the coke brothers doing kansas all the time. -- the koch brothers do in kansas all the time. can you address that out all? guest: let me address the way the atf functions. the point that you raise is an interesting one, the broad mandate, the fact that it is dealing with explosives, tobacco, alcohol, and firearms. it has been attempted on several occasions, once during the

reagan administration and once under president clinton, to move the atf either into the fbi or the secret service. the reason that it was suggested that that be done was to give it that more specific focus that the caller suggests, simply on firearms. what happens when that was discussed was that the national rifle association immediately weighed in and opposed that move, and one of the riders on the atf appropriation that peter referred to earlier specifically says that the atf's functions shall not be moved from atf to another agency. specifically, they had in mind either the secret service or the fbi, which has much more -- they are much more popular in the public eye, have a better

reputation, and they have more money. the nra wanted it maintained in the atf where it is today because it has been able to control its ability to operate. >> in the christian science monitor weekly newspaper, 1.4 million guns. that is the number of guns stolen earring burglaries and other property crimes between 2005 and 2010. 80% of those have never been recovered. wayne is in springfield, west virginia. good morning. caller: i would like to let the people know that those four little words, "shall not be infringed," they cannot take that right away from you. no judge, no jury, for no reason. our forefathers intended for us to be able to protect ourselves from law enforcement, and whatever they have, the people have the right to have. the majority of law enforcement are corrupt. maryland is so bad, they had bad

videotape in law enforcement. can you comment on that? >> i would be glad to address that. in fact, the right to own a firearm is not unlimited. the courts have upheld limits. interestingly, as a gun owner and a strong supporter of the second amendment, you should read the most important supreme court decision in recent years, district of columbia versus heller, which said a private individual does have the right to own a firearm for self- defense. the author of that opinion, justice scalia, said that in fact -- and he cited specifically the point that you raise about selling -- about felons. felons do not have the right to own a firearm in the united states, and others do not. in addition, scalia suggested

that laws on conceal/carry, laws to -- there are limits on gun ownership in the united states. there have been really since the founding, and the interesting debate that is forthcoming post heller decision is to see where the court will come down on whether or not it is going to allow for additional restrictions on gun ownership. host: has the atf always been designed in its current form? did it used to be stronger, etc.? guest: no, it was not always designed in its current form. it just that with spirits, alcohol. alcohol came in in the 1950's. host: you are on with alan

berlow, our guest on "washington journal." caller: thank you. i have a couple comments here, and i will take the answers off the air. i have a couple of concerns that i am sure a lot of people do. one of which the questions of strong purchases, in reference to fast and furious that was never, who -- given the comments of how they went down, i think that needs to be addressed. then a comment in reference to the gentleman from west virginia. what concerns me is, within the last several years, the department of homeland security has purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition and have been distributing them through internet government agencies. there is not much information

given as to the reason why, or any comments being made about this. it seems like nobody has talked about it. but the other thing is, i am a strong believer in our second amendment and believe it is part of our heritage, art of the constitution, the bill of rights. most citizens in this country -- the other thing is, in the city of chicago, as you well know, it has the highest murder rate per capita of anywhere in this country. the last time i heard, the murder rate this year has some of the most restrictive laws in the nation. host: mr. berlow, comments for that caller? guest: the caller addresses a lot of points. i think the underlying concern of many gun owners is that somehow if you have any sort of new gun laws that it is going to

lead to confiscation. this has been the argument of the national rifle association certainly under its current leadership for about the last 20 years, that any sort of licensing, registration, will lead to confiscation. i don't think there is very much evidence for that. the fact is we have had this law on the books since 1934. there has not been any case of confiscation by the government. you know, i just don't -- i understand it is very useful politics for the nra to make this claim, but in fact it has never materialized in any substantial way. i guess that is the only thing i am going to say. host: according to the atf and 2010, they did 13,000 inspections and found 1652 violations, 71 revoking of

licenses. and you say in your report, alan berlow, even with the in dash with the violations, the atf investigations else when more than 68,000 convictions between 2005 and 2010, sending more than 55,000 criminals to prison for an average of 15 years each. next call comes from jacob in .ichmond, an virginia caller: good morning. i am a kid, and i am very interested in the second amendment and politics. one caller cited an interesting statistic that in chicago, there are more gun laws, stricter gun greatmore gun violence i that is what we see here. once you give government more power, it will abuse that power.

it is a bit of an extreme position or argument, but hitler was a nothing. he was a nothing. and then he rose to power, and then he killed many millions of people. i think that if we give government the power to take away our guns, maybe they will take away our handguns. as a conservative, the argument for me is, what's next? host: jacob, you say you are a kid. how old are you? caller: i am 12. host: do your parents share your views? caller: one of them does. host: are you a gun user? caller: no, but i plan to. we had just watched safety things, and it is interesting. host: jacob, where do you go to school? caller: i go to a private school

in richmond. host: thanks for calling in this morning. we appreciate you watching c- span. any response for jacob? guest: when icaller: i have a ln with him. i became my states rifle champion at around age 12 for 13. i cannot recall now. it was a long time ago. i think the interesting question he raises about confiscation and the government confiscating our weapons is this -- there are 300 million guns out there in private hands. i have always ask myself the question, let's assume the government wants to take all our guns away, including, and you know, the data sitting on granny's night stand at night -- how are they going to go about

confiscating 300 million firearms? what is the vehicle for that? is it the marines, the armed forces? and wouldn't people object to that? how would this be done? the nra suggested this would be done extra legally. certainly going into the 2008 election and again going into the 2012 election, the implication was that the obama administration was preparing to do this. to repeal the second amendment requires a two-thirds vote of the senate. i am not a student of the congress, but i can tell you, i -- most seen much of it people to pass a new assault weapons ban. the idea that they're going to repeal the second amendment seems really far-fetched to me. the idea that they would tolerate confiscation of guns, i do not think that is going to happen. host: the last call for alan berlow comes from al.

caller: thank you for taking my call. hello, alan. i want to ask about criminal records. 52 years ago, i had a critical -- criminal record. is it all right for old senior citizens to have an old shotgun in his house to protect his own? furthermore, i would like to mention, the people talking about and not sell guns, do not sell guns -- stop selling the ammunition. you cannot run a car without gas. seldom all the guns they want to, just do not sell the bullets -- sell all the guns that want to, just do not sell the bullets. guest: a couple of things, there are proposals landing congress right now to retire -- require background checks for purchases

of ammunition. i cannot address the particular concern about your ancient felony record. i think that can be addressed simply. there are ways to get that right back, even if you have a conviction. i am not a lawyer. i do not know what they are. the other thing i would say is anybody interested in reading this will report, it is available at public knows this integrity -- public integrity.org. host: do you still shoot today? guest: i do not. i gave it up for financial reasons at the time. it became very expensive hobby. i could not afford to upgrade the gun i was using. i outgrew its, did not have the money, and then i went on and got it to other things. i would be curious to know if i could go back and do it and still have the same proficiency. i kind of doubt it. host: if you like to read his

study on the atf, public integrity.org is the website. for the next two hours, we're going to be looking at the topic of gun ownership and gun rights in america with guests joining us from the blue ridge arsenal in chantilly, virginia, about an hour outside of washington in the suburbs, out by dulles airport. our first guest of the morning is larry pratt, executive director of gun owners of america. he joins us from blue ridge. what is the gun owners of america association and how are you different from the nra? guest: gun owners of america has been lobbying the congress for over 30 years, and we were founded a little differently from the nra. they were set up to help the federal government train people to shoot better. union soldiers were not very good shots.

as a result of that after the war between the states, the nra was founded to try to overcome that the call to. gun owners of america was founded in 1970's to oppose with the federal government was doing as it increasingly got itself involved in gun control issues. so one perhaps set up to help the government, the other to oppose what the government was doing. host: do you share the same legislative agenda as the nra? guest: we frequently are pursuing the same objectives, which is to, obviously, stop the spread of gun-control the federal level. certainly at gun owners of america we think that "shall not be infringed" does not fit very well with gun control legislation at all. host: some of the president's recent proposals, and this is from the white house website, include these when it comes to gun-control, gun proposals,

requiring background checks for all gun sales, a new ban on military-style assault weapons, magazines to 10 rounds, and stronger punishment for gun trafficking, and improving gun at tracing data. is there anything there that you could support? guest: no, we think that the white house missed the mark when they failed to point out that what we need to do is get rid of the gun-free zones that have been imposed over the last 20 years, particularly on schools. it is in gun-free zones over the last 20 years that we have suffered the mass murders that have occurred in this country. we're hoping that the point is finally going to dawn on others that gun-free zones are a very bad idea and that is going to make the country a lot safer when we get rid of them. host: the "washington journal"

is live from blue ridge arsenal in a chantilly, virginia. our guest right now is larry pratt. gun owners of america is his group. he is the executive director. bob in at tennessee on our republican line, please give your question or comment. caller: yes, nice to meet you, mr. pratt, and thank you for letting me beyond the "washington journal." on the subject of the atf, i know that the second amendment is in the constitution. it is our bill of rights. what about the constitutionality of the atf? speaking of the fast and furious program, and american citizens to take the atf serious seeing what we're left with with holder

and president barack obama? guest: he makes a very good point. it is stunning that we have made the federal government complicity in mass murder. some 400 + mexican nationals, a couple of our own federal agents have been murdered by guns that were supplied to criminals through the fast and furious program. intentionally allowed to get into the hands of criminals. and to the federal government then turned around and say that they're going to oversee whether or not the rest of us are behaving properly with firearms, that is a little hard to see the logic to that. host: when did you first get interested in the issue of guns, gun ownership, gun-control? guest: well, in the mid-1970's, gun owners of america was

organized and i was working in washington at the american conservative union. the state senator that founded gun owners of america was looking for somebody to head it up and i thought that would be a great place to defend the constitution. so i have been with gun owners of america ever since. host: read in a new york city on our gun owners line. -- fred. caller: good morning. one of the previous callers made a comment that they could sell all the guns they want to but limit the ammunition. that only raises the cost of the ammunition. they would still be able get it. it will not solve the issue. we need to get focused. we need to educate people. it is not the people who are

educated -- mental disease is another issue. they have to deal with these issues to help stem the amount of crime in you see involving our children, our teenagers. this is ridiculous that we blame the guns. it is not begun. if it was not a gun, it would be a baseball bat, something else. host: we will get an answer in a moment. but as a gun owner in new york city, was that a difficult process? guest: actually, i am licensed and it saved my life. if it was not for that, i would not know what to think about these laws. host: what do you mean? caller: i was brought into the city in actually given an award for stopping a person with a shotgun that literally blew three shots into a store, tried

to kill a bunch of women in the clothing store. i shot them. host: are you licensed? caller: i was licensed at the time. i got my permit and moved out of the city. host: thank you for that. mr. pratt? guest: that is a pretty dramatic account from somebody who has had to use a gun in self- defense. no gun owner i know is ever looking forward to anything like that, but it is remarkable that he was one of the 4,000 or so a day, according to the clinton justice department, that do use a firearm in self-defense. obviously, he is pretty happy that he was able to do so. host: next call from birmingham, alabama. caller: good morning, a first- time caller. my question, comments, and

issues are that people are talking about second amendment rights. they have to realize that the second amendment was written years and years ago. it needs to be amended. the people who we put there to control these laws, they're being controlled by these lobbies, the nra, and probably this guy's group also. what type of money is he contributing to all these people who were there to protect us instead of doing what they want to do? guest: well, i think the caller is making an argument that is frequently made by people who have questions about this second amendment. yeah, the second amendment was written in the 18th century. so was the first amendment. yes, many years have gone by and firearms have developed. technology has changed.

but we still have rifles and we still have handguns, even though there are different technologies involved with them. very much the same as the first amendment. the technology we're using right now, which is protected by the first amendment, is something that is unimaginable, i would think, for the people of the 18th century, but, nevertheless, it is protected by the first amendment, even as today's fire arms are protected by these and second amendment and the bill of rights. host: if you listen to this video that we're going to play a vice-president biden talking about the second amendment. i would like to get your reaction. [video clip] >> just as you do not have an individual right to buy an f-15 that you are a billionaire, just like you do not have the right to buy a tank, as i could do not have the right to buy an automatic weapon, those judgments have been made that there are no societal, reasonable susceptible

justification or constitutional justification for owning them. so my view is that it is totally a guarantee, not negotiable that i am able to own a weapon for sporting purposes as well as my own protection, but there should be rational limits on the type of weapon i the needhat exceeded that go beyond the need for my protection. host: larry pratt? guest: the vice-president has been making a number of statements lightly on firearms. perhaps his most recent involved his opinion that a shotgun is easier for a woman to handle than an ar-15. frankly, that rebuild to many of us that the vice president is completely ignorant about the nature of shotguns and ar15's.

a shotgun is much more difficult to fire, much more difficult to hold an withstand its recoiled bamboo an ar-15. for the vice president to suggest that a woman would be better off using a shotgun shows that, frankly, he does not know what he is talking about. the same thing with his statement there on the second amendment. yes, the founders did have a somewhat limited view of what kind of fire arms or what kind of arms were covered by the second amendment. their view was that every man should have military -- of military age should have a rifle, a military rifle, like the m16 today and own it personally and be required to bring it with them if he were called up to militia duty. the purpose of owning guns for the founders was not that which was articulated by the vice- president, which was self

defense or sporting news, but it was protection against a tyrannical government. maybe because the vice-president is a new government service now he does not like to think about the possibility, but that is actually what the second amendment is all about. host: according to the atf, in 2011, 2.6 million pistols were sold in the u.s., 2.3 million rifles. 862,000 shotguns. 573,000 revolvers. larry pratt is our guest, executive director of gun owners of america. the national rifle association was also invited to participate in this program and they have declined. blue ridge arsenal is our base this morning in chantilly, virginia for the next couple of hours. we will be talking with employees and looking at some of the products and services the blue ridge arsenal gunshot and

range provides as we take calls with our guest larry pratt. dave is in michigan. caller: hello, my message in reaction to many things is i really have not heard anything as far as what has been brought forth yeah -- why do we not see when a gun is purchase, whether it is a straw purchase, whether it is dealer, why do we not see -- why have we not all heard about a gun lock be issued by a federal base or by some needs of stamping a gun lock with the serial number with that particular gun, that coordinates with that gun? i have seen in alaska, opening up the trunk of a person's

vehicle, if there is a gun in the back, it is an ar and out of the case. they go through the formalities and so forth, make sure it is unloaded. down the road he goes. but what i do not understand is why we do not have a way of tracing its curative the numbers do not match the serial number of the gun. where is the other guy? guest: i am not quite sure i understood. he was asking about serial numbers as the deadlock with a gun -- a gun lock with a gun. i think that is what he was talking about. guns are sold today with gunlocks on the them. i throw my away when i get them home. i put my guns in the safe. but if i want to take it out, and most definitely will not ite a gun locke on it because

appears its ability to function. if i am using it in self- defense, having a gun lock on it is the worst thing in the world. host: abby ever had to use a gun in self-defense. -- have you ever used a gun in self-defense? guest: happily, i have never had to. host: according to reuters, there were 19.6 million applications in 2012 for the national instant criminal background check system. kentucky, texas, california ranked the highest on the list of requested screenings. we were talking with alan berlow earlier from the center for public integrity about his new study on the atf. would you support changing the rule when it comes to getting rid of the information from these and background checks within 24 hours?

thet: we think that's former congressman had it right when he succeeded and congress agreed with him in requiring that the government destroy the record of a background check. if they do not, and we're not sure if they do in spite of his efforts, then they are able to build a registration list of who has done and what guns they have. registration lists are not a crime fighting tool. when the background check was begun, a study was published in the early part of this century in the journal of the american medical association, and it found that the background checks had not had any impact on lowering crime. but we're concerned that the background check does give the government the opportunity to keep that information, and that

is something that was used to confiscate guns in new york a few decades ago. it was used to confiscate guns after katrina. government's only use registration lists to confiscate guns. they do not find it helpful in fighting crime. host: a tweet from maverick -- guest: having your fire are covered by insurance is one thing. that is a private company. hopefully they are going to respect the privacy of your information, but they would need that information of the gun were stolen or somehow lost to identify the gun as belonging to you if it is recover. but for the government to have that information is another matter. arguably the government is keeping it to fight crime.

but as we know from the studies that have been done, it is not useful in fighting crime. host: how many guns do you own? guest: i do not know. host: all right. out at blue ridge arsenal gunshot and range as our colleague, mr. pedro echevarria. warner,e joined by mark a member of the senior sales staff. what do you sell here? >> rifles, handguns, revolvers, shotguns. >> how many guns it purchased a day approximately? >> probably tell and maybe. >> on the counter we have something that looks like a rifle, one looks like a pistol. what are we looking at here? >> this is an aris style rifle

-- air style rifle. over here is a glock 17 handgun, one of the most commonly bought guns. a great fire are to use for target shooting in competition shooting. >> tell us about the various parts, starting with the pistol grip. >> the grip, possible stock. you can have on our. a grip for shooting like this or you can go like this for the grip. we have the third arm magazine. >> how does that go in? you said 30 rounds. are there magazines with more? >> 5, 10, 20, 30.

i have seen some that hold 40. some magazines will actually hold 100. >> are there rules and regulations that dictate what kind of magazine and sizes you can sell? >> not here. >> is this known as the military-style assault weapon? >> in the civilian world, we world, ar-15, but yes. >> it is known as a semi- automatic? >> yes, one trigger pull, one round fired. >> the various pieces make it a military-style assault weapon? are there others? >> there are other versions out there. in the u.s., this is the most commonly used military-style great fire arm. >> what is in them? >> steel. some are made of aluminum. some of them are made out of carbon fire, light weight.

-- made out of carbon fiber. >> how many of these types do you sell? >> we average of 81 or two a day. recently, it has been a few more. -- we average about one or two a day. recently, it has been a few more. >> why is that? >> the talk about controlling things. people are buying them faster now because they're concerned about loss been changed. >> what is the cost like? >> it can go anywhere from $800 up to 2500, depending on the manufacturer and designer. >> what is the difference in the cost? >> it is about the manufacture. some of the bigger names like colt, their quality is a little bit better. so you'll pay more money. >> show was the pistol. this is a lot, right? what does that mean?

>> that is the manufacturer, glock. this is the most commonly used gun. people compete to use it. handgun hunters use them. it is weather-resistant. simple to operate and maintain. >> forget the academics, what kind of bullhook -- bullets does it should? >> caliber 45. there are conversion kits for them. and less recoil. >> is this one poll, one shot? >> it is an automatic handgun, yes. you have to go through an atf background check to get this. it is more expensive. it takes several months to get approved by the atf.

once approved, you get an atf stamp which allows you to own this type of firearm. >> tell us about the magazine. how much does it hold? >> and where from 10 rounds to 17 rounds, depending where it was produced. this is the 17-round magazine that we use in our rental guns. this model comes was 17-round capacity. another one has a 15-room capacity. and another one with a 10-round capacity. >> he will be talking to us throughout the morning. in a little bit, we will see these guns in action on the range. thank you. host: can you hear me? >> yes. host: when you ask mr. warner what his personal -- how many guns he owns and what kind? >> the host in the studio wants

to know how many guns you own. >> several. i have never kept count. i am an avid shooter and a hunter. i have been doing it for 15 years. i enjoy the sport in the camaraderie. >> handguns and rifles? >> handguns, rifles, shotguns, yes. >> give us an example of some of their rifles your own. >> i own a few m-4 style firearms. i own eight glocks. i enjoy shooting. >> how did you get into it? >> i grew up hunting and shooting as a kid outdoors. in its summertime, we would shoot at soda cans are go hunting. i have done our security work, so i have had a personal training. i got a part-time job selling with this sport and it became a full-time. host: thank you, pedro, live at

blue ridge arsenal gunshot and range. mr. pratt, do you know offhand how many of the guns we're looking at our american made, imported, and more? guest: since i do not have my eye on them, it is hard to say, but americans have the benefit of a free market. they can buy guns made here, made from abroad. assembled here but parts made from abroad. we have got quite an opportunity to get exactly what we're looking for here. host: this tweet from somebody who goes by the innate -- name oversight the gop -- guest: [laughs] well, i think you look at the history of the second amendment, you find that the founders were thinking

pretty much of the marina slocan today, "every man a rifle." -- the founders were thinking of the marine slogan today. they wanted every man to own a rifle and have it ready for duty if called up. but if that person was in the militia and belonged to an artillery unit, he was not required to bring artillery with him, but he still had to bring his rifle. the handguns, long guns, but nothing else but that would be considered military hardware. host: greg is in arlington, tennessee on our republican line. caller: they always interpret the constitution where it says "well-regulated militia," and back in those times i believe

they meant well-trained, like you said. two, your guest before larry was asking what they thought gun confiscation would look like. would it be military or the police, and he kind of laughed at it. but if you go on youtube and put in gun confiscation during katrina, you will see several videos of them actually going into houses, and even injure this one elderly lady by attacking her and taking her pistol out of her hand. if anybody would go on there and look at it, it really made me sick seeing that in person. host: in a response? guest: the confiscation was made possible by the authorities going to dealers, such as this one, going through the records

that they are required to maintain for the federal government, getting a list of people who had purchased firearms, their addresses, with the firearms work, and then they went to those houses and confiscated those guns. they had no authority for that. they are ultimately lost in federal court. by the time the victory by gun owners was achieved the most of the guns had rested because the government of the city of new orleans did not give a never mind and left the guns in an exposed condition and in rather extreme humidity that they experience there, so the guns or ruined. oh, too bad. host: what statement did gun owners of america make after sandy hook? guest: following sandy hook, gun owners of america was pretty outraged. we pointed out that the politicians have to accept some blame for what happened, for having facilitated what happened

in sandy hook. all of the mass murders in our country in the last 20 years with one exception have occurred in legally-required gun-free zones. these are places where you just are not allowed to legally have a gun. and whether it was a mall in utah, whether it was a theater in colorado, or whether it was at this school -- typically it has been at schools, that is where these mass murders occurred. our response that was let's get rid of the laws that require people to be disarmed, precisely in places where the mass murders have occurred. host: harrison, nebraska, good morning. caller: hello, the thing i would like to say is to make a comment about how good it is to see good professional people working at gun shops all over this country.

most of them are just normal people, not crazy people like they like to be portrayed. the other one i would like to have larry do is explained how fast it took them in australia and great britain to have full gun confiscation in those countries, because it did happen in happened pretty darn quick. i am a member of the nra and the gun owners of america and i would like them both to work together on this because this is one of the more serious times for gun owners in this country. thank you. guest: well, gun confiscation did occur in both of the countries he mentioned, and it was facilitated by the fact that when people bought guns, they bought them and everything was registered. they bought them from stores where there had to be records kept, both in britain and australia. in britain, virtually all guns were confiscated. if there were not confiscated,

they knew you had one. they would come for it and you'd be in legal kind -- trouble. in australia, the confiscated all of the semiautomatic firearms. for all their trouble in britain, while they do have a lower murder rate than we have in the united states, it is the most violent country in world save three. criminals have a field day in great britain because they know that nobody is going to be able to effectively resist them. all they really need is a baseball bat or a tire iron and they can work their will against a disarm the population. it has not lowered crime, and it has made life rather nasty in great britain in particular. host: back to the "christian science monitor" report on guns in america. 1.8 million rifles manufactured in 2010. pistols, 2.25 million in 2010.

a call from birmingham, alabama. you're on the "washington journal." larry pratt of gun owners of america is our guest. are you with us? moving on to david in oklahoma. caller: howdy. yes, i have a comment for mr. pratt. first of all, i pat him on the back for what they are trying to do to support gun ownership. i have been around guns all my life. i was raised on them. and i have never seen a gun get up by itself and walk over and shoot anybody. and they are climbing this is all about the guns. the guns are not the killers. the people behind the trigger are. basically, what all this is

about is i have been telling people for years that -- and i am not saying our government is the antichrist, but they are laying the table down for him. i have told people for years now that the antichrist cannot dictate to a bunch of gun- packing free people. where this is going is their wont as to only be able to throw rocks and bottles when the government comes against the people -- they want us to only able to throw rocks and bottles, but they can throw bullets' back. guest: well, i think the point has to be underscored that, even in the case of the last mass murder, which is unhappily somewhat typical of the kind of person that committed previous ones, you had somebody that was involved in video games, and perhaps more than the video game

itself, that the murderer apparently had almost no interaction with other people whatsoever. it was just sort of dead to the rest of the world. he had paid to set up in four states and, so he was obviously into the occult -- he had a page set up for satan. that is also somewhat typical for these kinds of people. so the debate over firearms kind of misses the point that these sort of person that gets involved in these terrible crimes is not very typical of the average american. you do not have too many people running around with a facebook page for the double -- devil. host: the number of mass shootings in the u.s. since 2000, 14. the number of perpetrators to use the high-capacity magazine during an assault, 14. mr. pratt, why no limits on the

size of the magazine, how many bullets you can store? guest: well, and limit on the size of the magazine means that there would be a limit on how much of a self defense you would be able to bring about. and i think that is the part of the equation that gets overlooked. again, the clinton justice department found that some 4,000 + times a day an american uses of firearms to defend himself. typically, the firearm is not even have to get fired. it is enough for the assailant to realize that, uh-oh, i do not plan on that, and they typically fully when they see it. but when you're in a situation where your life is being threatened, the idea that you should only be able to have six, or new york state, seven rounds, or what ever some politician may arbitrarily decide is enough,

that is really kind of evil, to tell somebody that your life is over when you run out of bullets and we're going to tell you what capacity magazine you are going to have. host: albany, kentucky, good morning. caller: my comment is that 20 years ago when i was going through high-school, most of the kids that i went to school with went hunting early in the morning. they had their rifle or shotgun with them and would go hunting and then go into school. at no time during my school career did anybody ever consider a mass shooting. i know you are trying to get rid of these gun-free zones. of more kids or school guards, whoever the schools have there,

try to access these guns, you in no longer have these mass shootings. what is your thought on that, sir? guest: we were very pleased that the representative from near houston, texas introduced into the house of representatives here in washington hr-35, which is a bill that would eliminate the gun-free school zones and make it possible -- it would not require, but it will make it possible for principals, teachers, ejectors, and visiting parents, if they have a concealed carry permit, to bring a can still carry firearms on to the premises of the school. that would, overnight, change the equation that seems to operate in the sick minds of those who have engaged in mass murder. whether they knew it or not, they would be running into the likelihood that, unlike newtown,

connecticut where the murderer had 20 minutes to work his will against unarmed teachers and children, he might only have a couple of seconds before he is facing return fire. host: today we are at blue ridge arsenal gunshot and range out in chantilly, virginia, in the outer suburbs of washington, d.c. larry pratt is our guest, executive director of the gun owners of america. later, emily miller of the "washington times." she has written a series called "emily gets her gun." she will be joining us as well. we will be talking to various members of the staff at blue ridge, talking about some of the products and services that they offer. tomorrow, the brady campaign's mr. goddard will be on this program, a survivor of the

virginia tech shootings. what is your opinion of the brady campaign? guest: well, the brady campaign thinks that restrictions on firearms are a good idea, and our message to them is they are not considering self defense. they do not see guns useful in self-defense. we do. host: dana tweets -- guest: a number of states have decided that former felons should after they have been free from any incarceration that they might have been subjected to, if they go a number of years, whenever that might be in that state, with a clean record, then, yes, they should be a protect themselves the way anybody else in society does, once they have demonstrated that they're going to be an upstanding citizen. they should not have a permanent

disability. host: a call from florida on our gun owners line. caller: good morning. it is great to see larry pratt on tv. i do not have a weapon, per se. i am working on getting my own. i was on active duty in the marine corps. i am retired now. i worked on weapons the whole time in my military career. i saw a lot of things go on during my career. my mom was raped on two different occasions. i had access to a weapon at that time to defend my family. things did not go as we would have liked. system says it protect the citizens. that is incorrect based on what i have lived, as victims. these gun-free zones and the

other things they claim are there to protect us to do not. they do not care, felons. they will find a weapon no matter what. they will purchase is -- they will purchase the from criminals. in the criminal knows where to go, what to do, and they can get the weapon. [indiscernible] they forget what happened in germany with the nazis. the same thing is going on right now. host: all right, a lot on the table there. a response? guest: i was just thinking during his comments that we had a gun-free zone in the district of columbia for years, and that did not do them much good. they had one of the highest murder rates of any jurisdiction certainly in the country and pretty much in the world. it has gone down now since the gun ban has been ended.

still above the national average, probably about twice. interestingly, out in fairfax county where i am is sitting right now the blue ridge arsenal in chantilly, the murder rate is .3 per 100,000. about 30 times that in the district of columbia. the murder rate here in fairfax county where, as you can see from the gun store you're looking at during this show, guns are readily available here in fairfax county. we have a lower murder rate than in the country of the united kingdom where almost all guns are banned. clearly, the idea that we're going to make ourselves better off by getting rid of guns does not work, as a number of people calling in have already pointed out. criminals do not obey the law. that is sort of the way criminals are. and they will get guns.

the question is, are we going to make it easy or hard for the good guys to be able to defend ourselves? host: as mr. pratt mentioned, he is joining us from blue ridge arsenal in chantilly, virginia. and our colleague pedro echevarria is out there as well. >> we are now out in the range of blue ridge arsenal. i am joined by mark warner. tell us about the range. how is it designed for safety? >> rifles and shotguns are used. we have steel as a backdrop. it limits the amount of ricochets. handguns, rifles, and shotguns. on the other side, handguns only. >> we're going to start with a glock.

go ahead and load it up, get it ready, and then hand it over to me. we will see what happens. [inaudible] let's give it a shot. >> " up -- close the gap. nice and firm. the trigger. [gun shots] all right. >> how many bullets? >> [inaudible] >> that about, what, 22nd? >> 10 seconds.

correct good shot, too. >> load up the rifle. again, same thing. get ready to go, hand off to me. i will shoot it and then hand it back to him. they have serious regulations. >> put these on. >> so i will go for it. >> safety off. >> switch it down, right? >> correct. target, and you are ready. >> ok. [gun shots]

>> safety on. >> i will hand it back to you. i noticed the recoil. >> it is very light. 83-way caliber rifle would have more recoil. -- a 3-way rifle. >> thank you, again. host: as we continue our live programs from blue ridge arsenal, that was pedro echevarria shooting the guns. i wish they had brought the target in so we could see his results. larry pratt is still with us out there at blue ridge as well. paul in ohio, democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i purchased my most recent fire

are and everything went smoothly. background check went ok. i was asked -- [indiscernible] host: we're going to move on it to dennis in massachusetts, gun owners line. caller: good morning. i am a proud gun owner. i served in the military during vietnam. i believe everyone should carry a gun. if we had more guns in this country, we would be safer. the manufacture it deems that gun 718-run magazine and a 30- run magazine -- have a 18-round magazine. we have to protect ourselves. the police department cannot be there when we need them. i was attacked in my driveway a couple months ago and it took the police department eight minutes to get here after the fact. we need to protect ourselves.

thank you very much. keep up the work. host: what kind of weapons do you own? four15's and handguns and shotguns. i use it for competition. host: what does your hobby cost you per year? caller: i probably spend about $1,000 in gunpowder and primers. i do all my own reloads. host: thank you for calling in. we are out at blue ridge. pedro echevarria is going to show us his targets. let's see how well you did. >> here is the target. here are the shots from the 9 millimeter. these are the shots from the

rifle. i was told the reason why was over to be shut -- shoulder was -- [inaudible] that is just a look at the target. that is what happened with the rifle. host: ken in corona, california. the one with your question or comment for larry pratt, gun owners of america. caller: i own a security guard firm in california and in louisiana. in california, there is a huge problem with the ban on where you -- the gun-free zones. in the east los angeles area, there is a high school that at armed security guards. i was one of them.

i worked part time during special events at that school. they have got gangs all around that area. so all the crime is coming from there and it is in a school zone. the high school is owned by a charter school system. are you familiar with that? host: where are you going with this? caller: they enforce all these laws, yet we, as armed security guards, have had the gunfire area for a long time. we have the fire with our small calibers. we are only allowed to carry 10 rounds in california. so under fire -- given the sheriff's department is under fire, and gunned and unmanned. guest: an interesting comment that the professional security guard is outgunned in a school

zone. that tells you something about how poor judgment, to put it very mildly, many of our legislators have when they tell us that nobody should have a gun at a school. well, that is disinviting the criminal to be the only one with a gun if he wants to engage in this criminal activity -- that is just inviting the criminal, whether it is a mass murderer or a gang banger. it does not affect the behavior of criminals, these gun-free zones. maybe we are coming to the point where we are beginning to see that. hopefully there will be a push back. i think we're beginning to see that. politicians are going to be hearing from people, such as the caller, that you guys got it wrong. we have to get rid of these bans, because they only apply to us good guys. host: larry pratt, you're

sitting at the arsenal in blue ridge in chantilly. what kind of process is it for a gunshot like that to get a license? guest: you have to contact an agent, a bureau, and the justice department to apply for a license. you have to be approved after a background check by the federal government. eventually they would be able to get their license and engage in retail sales. it is only with that license that there would be a byproduct from manufacturers and distributors -- that they would be able to buy products. host: should gun shows and federally licensed dealers be treated the same legislatively? guest: that is a question that is heading toward the background check, in pink, and the background check is something that we know, from studies published in the anti-gun general of the american medical association, do not lower crime.

they do not have any utility as a crime-fighting tool. so we do not think that private sales should, for a minute, be subjected to the kind of background checks that have already been shown to be cute while -- to be few title. guest: is that the only difference legislatively between gun shows and licensed dealers? guest: well, at gun shows, most of the transactions actually are carried out by licensed dealers. there is only a small handful of sales that occur from people who perhaps have their own collection and are selling it off or maybe they are trying to trade and complete a collection by getting a certain firearm that would round out their collection. those are the minority, a strong minority of the transactions that occur at gun shows.

most of the sales actually are conducted through licensed dealers. host: when we talked with alan berlow earlier, he said if somebody came in to buy five or more weapons, then the gun shop has to fill out a special form. is that correct? guest: actually, i think it is 3. in any case, yes, there is a multiple sales requirement that a special report be sent to the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. that means they will actually look at that transaction, whereas they really are not looking at other transactions. host: do you support the multiple sales raising kind of a flag? guest: no, actually, we do not. we do not think that the federal government has a legitimate role in this. it does not been shown that any of this infringement has done anything to fight crime.

and if anything, sometimes these approvals are delayed and delayed and delayed. my name may be similar to somebody else's name, and if the government does not give a clear go-ahead, a lot of dealers will just come out of fear of the reprisals from the federal government, even though it is illegal to go ahead and sell a gun were there was maybe my name was the same except for an initial -- where even though it was legal, they just will not go ahead and make that sale. and people are unnecessarily and improperly denied because of these inadequacies of the background check. so there are problems that people do not hear about which affect probably some 10% of the transactions. host: back to the report on guns in america. gun deaths, rifles versus handguns, at the heart of the

current gun-control movement. bill in boca raton, thanks for holding. caller: it is interesting to listen to you talk. i am a gun owner, and more on the gun control side of things. i watched people like you all the time and infuriates me

checking your veracity. you said three things that i understand to be wrong and i wonder what else is just isn't correct. you explained in the recent mass shootings that there was one exception to gun-free locations. your thesis is that we should have more gun available places but it is clearly not true. the second thing, i don't know where you get your statistics about britain being the third most violent in the world but that is clearly wrong. maybe industrialized country? and the gun shops, background checks having that an effective -- been ineffective. there have been a couple thousand gun sales that have been prohibited over the last

few years. >> we will get a response to those points. >> out of those hundred thousand, there were a few of those, at least one that was effective. >> i own a glock. i can count how many guns i own. i don't know that to be false. host: why do you have a glock? guest: i enjoy target shooting. host: gun free locales? guest: it is a matter of attack whether it is gorgeous theater or this school a new town. they were gun-free zones and the law itself either permitted the owner of the theater to post no

guns or the school was required to be a gun-free zone. as i said earlier, i nfairfax where guns are readily availab le, the state of virginia makes it fairly easy to get a concealed and carry permit. we have a murder rate that is lower than most countries in the world. england happens to be the fourth most violent country exceeded by health salvador and honduras and i forget the other one. doing away with guns does not make a society civil or a pleasant place to live. host: licensing and background

checks? guest: we know that the study that was published, the background check before and after they were in effect did not contribute to a lessening in crime. i think we have to say that is to their credit because they have a decidedly anti-second amendment editorial policy. people that might be victims being armed. we have locales where people can carry concealed firearms and those are areas where we tend to have lower violent crime rates. in places like the district of columbia where it is virtually impossible, the violent crime rate is quite a bit higher than out here in fairfax county.

caller: thank you for c-span. i am a retired police officer. in what people would call the hood. thousands of times, people with guns were able to defend themselves in violent crimes and protect the people around them. i don't believe american citizens should ever be infringed upon. that is why they call us free. people that are out to remove guns are people that don't understand them, have not witnessed real crime, and i don't know. they just don't trust americans.

guest: i think that is a very good point. there is a lack of trust of those that believe guns only belong in the hands of the government. the country was founded on a different philosophy that guns belong in the hands of the average person. when the british crown embargo the importation of ammunition to the colonies, it was more evidence that they were getting close to cutting the cord with mother britain. host: gary tweets -- referring to an article about people making guns or components on 3d printers. guest: if you make a gun from a

3 the printer, you might be able to fire at once. possibly the magazine, the multiple-round magazine might be more feasible. it is a new technology with interesting implications for the future of gun-control. if it does develop, it will probably mean gun control needs to be put into the trash can for real and for good. host: larry pratt, you for being on the "washington journal." we are a lot of warning from the blue ridge arsenal in chantilly, virginia. it is on the outskirts of washington, d.c.

about an hour from where we're located in washington, d.c. they opened about seven minutes ago. the range is open, you might be hearing those all morning from our coverage of blue ridge. up next is emily miller, former press secretary and deputy secretary for condoleeza rice and colin powell. she also writes a blog "emily gets her gun." the continued to broadcast live from blue ridge arsenal in chantilly, virginia. as we are waiting for her to get seated, we will continue to take your calls.

there is no guest right now. what are your thoughts about gun laws? caller: i feel as a legal gun owner i'm under attack by all that's being talked about now. i have owned guns for approximately 15 years. i recently went out and purchased what everybody is calling assault rifle. i feel in my future i will not be able to buy that type of weapon. host: that is why you went out and bought one? guest: i think there is a ban coming. millions of people have gone out

and bought one. i am not a member of any organization. i don't want to be on a list of gun owners and i don't want people to know why own guns. -- know i own guns. the first two i bought, they sat in the closet for 15 years. that they are here for my protection. that is my right. i took my wife shooting the other day and she could barely hold the gun. if you are limiting the capacity of magazines, she could barely hit the target with 10 bullets. if someone comes to attack her, i want her to be able to shoot

as many bullets as she can shoot. host: when you hear the term "assault rifle" what do you think? guest: i think it is a made up term. one of the weapons you were showing was all dressed up with hand guards. if you take all that stuff off, it can function as a regular weapon. the look and aesthetics is labeled as an assault weapon. host: pat in arlington, texas. caller: good morning. a lot of the states require you to own a car before you can -- or have a driver's license

before you can buy a car. i feel the same way about guns. everyone should be required to have a concealed carry license before you can purchase a gun. the shoot-range show, owners have achl license lower fire rate than the police do. they are law abiding citizens i think nothing worse and the woman who has no experience with a gun holding one. if she misses the target, somebody else gets hit.

someone should have a license before you are allowed to purchase a gun. there should be a mandatory 10- year sentence. host: pat in arlington, texas. joining us at blue ridge is emily miller. i don't know if you just heard that color talking about women and guns, do you have response? guest: i shot a gun for the first time about a year ago. i'm new to it. i understand the first time that a range is scary. it's loud. even here now. like any skill you learn, train, and be responsible. host: what is "emily gets her

gun?" guest: a series i did for the washington times. host: why did you decide to get a gun? guest: i was a victim of a home invasion. i had taken a dog for a walk and left the front door closed, but unlocked. there was a man coming out of the house. he did not harm me, but he got my wallet and i followed him down the street. i thought i would get a photo. i found him with 15 other men alone in a cul de sac. i ran back into the house. the police said that the bad guy

had left the window open and would come back at night. all i could do was barricade myself in the bedroom and i thought if i had a gun by the night table, if these crazy bad guys came back, i would have a chance to defend myself. i found out very quickly that getting a gun in d.c. is one of the hardest things that you can do. host: what were some of the biggest obstacles that you face? guest: it took me from the time i started, four months and $435 not including the cost of the gun. it is prohibitively expensive for most residents.

host: [inaudible] how much was the gun? guest: $780. it was an investment. there is a requirement, a gun safety class. you could not teach in the city because they are required out in the range. it was restricted, where you could teach it and all these men teaching in their homes. i could not find an instructor. the city council, because of exposing this, the city council passed a law that took away that requirement, the five-hour class. there are still 11 steps to gun

ownership, down from 17 when i get it. guest: who is charles sikes, and what is his role in the gun buying process? host: he is the one legal gun dealer in washington d.c.. he has a unique role, transferring guns. it has to be transferred to a dealer in the state, same rules apply. if you buy a new one, you have to go through him. he got zoned out of his office and had no place to go. the city residents had no way to get legal handguns. the deal that was made was that he could work out of his dmv, a gun dealer in the dmv. i went three or four times.

i had to get a ballistics test from his office. he is the man that you call if you want to get a gun in d.c. host: why a sig? what is a sig? guest: sig-sauer is a brand like colt or remington. it is harder in washington because there are no ranges. people spend a lot of time trying different guns at the shooting range behind me. that is the way you can get a test for how it feels. i did it one time. there is one convenient gun range. i've narrowed it down to five because there are no carry rights in d.c.

lee put up a pole at the washington times to let people vote. they chose the sig-sauer. i got the stainless steel two- toned, so it looks cool, too. host: how often has emily practiced in the last year? guest: i go once every month or two. host: what are the restrictions when it comes to taking the gun out of the house? guest: washington d.c. is the last place in the country where it is illegal to bear arms. the second amendment is not recognized in the nation's capital. the court of appeals overturned the illinois state law that had the same provision that you could not leave with your gun.

there are 180 days to rewrite that to allow people to bear arms. d.c. is the only place where you can't take your gun out of your home. the only people that have guns on the streets are the bad guys. assaults are up 20% last year. violent crime is up 3%, i am not exactly sure because the police took down their crime statistics website. it is the last place, and it has to be overturned by the court eventually. it is neither safe, nor constitutional to have a law abiding people as sitting ducks. bad guys know there is a chance to shoot back.

and they will probably not target you. violent crime across the bridge is so much lower. there is very little chance you will have a gun to be able to shoot back when they want your found. -- your phone. host: as a reporter, how long have you investigated buying an illegal weapon in d.c.? guest: i have wanted to do that so badly but we have not been able to find a way. a way that would not put my life at risk or break the law. i will look at statistics when the police decide to put them back on line and see if guns are being stolen or bought off the streets and there is plenty of gun crime. host: "emily gets her gun" is

the series in the washington times. type in her name on washingtontimes.com. over six or seven months, you can see it on your screen. she joins us from blue ridge arsenal. you are hearing some noise in the background, the range is open. david in florida, you have been very patient. please go ahead. caller: how are you doing? host: good. felon: i'm a convicted and i own three guns. it was easy for me to purchase these guns. it was back in 2010. mlaws. for some -- some laws.

for people that tried to protect their family, they stay at home. they are for protection. i know a lot of criminals and when they come into someone's home, they will do what they have to do to get what they want. they are not going to care if this person has this or that. they will come and ready to get the job done. everybody has the right to protect their home under any and all circumstances. host: what kind of felony was it? guest: i have a bunch of minor theft felonies. i have aggravated battery on my record. i am considered a violent felon. even pre-kid days when i was out of control. host: did you go through a

gunshot? guest: no. host: did you buy that illegally? guest: yes. if i could have bought them legally, i would have done that. if i ever did commit a crime, they would say, do you have that gun? that is more circumstantial evidence they would have against me. i got my guns from texas. it took me four days from the time that i met someone here in florida that had to go to mexico, bring the firearms to texas. host: think you for sharing your story. aback i'm a little taken buyback color. the society-- by that caller.

the society agrees on limits and we agree that felons should not have guns. we agree that people that are mentally ill should not have guns. people that have restraining orders against them should not have guns. it is part of public safety. this color illuminates what is going on. the president is calling for this universal background check. he says he is with a law-abiding life now, but most active criminals are going to buy their guns however they can. checks do nothing to stop them. there are no gun control laws, it was proven that there is nothing that will reduce crime.

i think that color helps eliminate how those that we have decided should not own firearms are getting them anyway. guest: good morning, pedro. >> we have been talking about background checks all morning. what is this we are looking at? >> this is the state form. the buyer is required to provide documentation. they fill out the state formed at the federal form. -- state form and federal form. as far as make, model, serial number. >> before we go to the computer, are you a fugitive from justice? are you addicted to marijuana? have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective? >> it is in there as far as

people are required answer truthfully. if they enter falsely, we don't know. there is not a link between this and the check. they can put no and we'd never know it. >> that is based on the honor system. >> they all are. >> can misinformation be checked? >> it could , and the background check but the mental health one does not show up. -- come up in the background check but the mental health one does not show up. put the information in the computer, in 15-25 seconds, we will get approval or delay. a delay might be anything from having a common name to having

federal clearances. >> 30 seconds, is that standard? what is the longest? >> three months. it took awhile to get clarified. >> is there a federal website that this gets attached to? >> this is state locally. virginia backgroudn checks. >> tell us the number of background checks. averages 10-15 on certain days, the weekend as a little bit more. people are concerned about what is going on so it has been more

recently. >> can someone apply again if they have been rejected? >> the police can inquire as to why they are dyed. -- denied. sometimes there is just a mistaken they are approved after the fact. they are required to figure out on their own account why they were denied. >> how much? >> two dollars. >> per check. mark warner, thank you. guest: pedro, ask mr. warner if they ever refused to sell someone a guy even though they pass the background check? >> has the arsenal or you refused to sell someone a got even if they pass a background check? >> i have. i had someone that was

delayed. she made me feel very uncomfortable. she made comments about her past life and having issues with health. i decided to go ahead and refused the show even though she was delayed. she told me she had issues. >> anyone on staff can make that call? >> yes. guest: emily miller is also out at blue ridge arsenal. are women owners -- how common is it to be a woman gun owner? guest: womeit is the highest

it has ever been. it women understand 911 is pretty far away. uc offers for the class is in training sessions. -- you see offers for classes and training sessions. i have taught friend to shoot for the first time and several are getting guns for their own defense. i think you are seeing ownership on the rise because it is ok for women to own guns. houghnot just a man's world. -- is not just a man's world. i did try the laser, and my aim was amazingly better. host: from gallup, 45% of men own guns, 15% of women own guns.

in the south, you are most likely and if you are married you are most likely. 37% of married people own guns. jim, go ahead for emily miller. caller: comment is the way i see it, every american has a right to on a firearm. a firearm. i see shotguns and pistols, but the semiautomatics i don't understand. how many citizens really need an ak? one shot, one kill in armed forces. for home protection, i would rather have a shotgun. the boom is enough protect yourself and your family.

host: there are several issues in that caller. automatic weapons have been fully regulated since 1934. they are not used in crimes and it's not an issue. automatic guns are the ones they use in war suppression. pull the trigger and it fires until you stop. modern firearms are semi- automatic. pull the trigger once and a bullet comes out. it fires as fast as you pull the trigger. there is a fear of what the administration calls the assault weapon and technically, it is what he originally referred to as an automatic weapon which is not used in crimes. they are extremely expensive and

people can't afford them. rifles are rarely used in crimes. 11,000 people are killed by firearms, and even diane feinstein says there are 32 killed with assault weapons. a standard semi-automatic rifle with certain cosmetic appearances. if it has a pistol grip, which means you can hold the gun underneath it. a collapsing stock. in order to shoot an ar, they adjusted to fit me. it is just like every other gone, there are a lot of misconceptions because of the

language being used that there is no functional difference in any of the guns anyone is talking about. host: where did you grow up? did you grow up with firearms? guest: i lived in baltimore and my father had a handgun and a carry permit. but it was not discussed with his daughters. i found it one day when i was looking under his carseat. i saw the revolver under there. newly knowing this gun world, i suggest people keep it locked up. and also a teacher people about the gun and said, this is a weapon of self-defense. i suggest teaching the basics. the first thing you are drilled is to keep your finger off of the trigger until you are ready to fire. keep it focused in a safe

direction. i was a girl, and if i was a boy, i probably would have been more curious about that of all over. that is how accidents happened. my father will kill me after this interview. think it is not something the hide from children. teach them the simple laws. start playing with their friends, they can keep their figure of of the trigger and a safe direction. -- finger off of the trigger and in a safe direction. host: if you were a resident of virginia, how would the figures change?

guest: it would take me 10 minutes and two dollars. there is such a contrast because i live in d.c. that is why these laws are so ridiculous. there is more crime in four months, so many of these laws are being passed in connecticut, new york, new jersey, delaware. it will have the exact same result, or you have to register every gun and the government knows where everyone is. it does not prevent, or prevent mass shootings. it just makes law-abiding people more vulnerable. across the potomac river, i would have had a gun in a few minutes and a background check that day. host: monica tweets --

do you know what cch stands for? guest: concealed carry, not sure the h. host: who was your trainer? guest: the class that is no longer required, oddly enough the governor of maryland is trying to enforce that even though the police say it doesn't work. i found a police list of instructors and found a woman in maryland. i felt a lot safer than going to some man's house. she had a real store front and a

real business with a gun training and safety. host: bruce, go ahead with emily miller. caller: one of the things i found most frustrating and profound from my perspective is that everybody is talking about how this issue can or cannot be addressed through legislation when i believe there are two things going on that you can't legislate. it is about truth. how you respond with emotions and how you respond with facts to support a position. the first part of an russians, when you look at killers out there. -- of emotions, when you look at killers out there, if you find where they get their mindset from, they found validation not from video games but from other people.

people on the talk shows, they get them all worked up. maybe you go to a bar and both guys have restraining orders talking in violent language what they need to do to their ex- girlfriend. the first thing we should do is point fingers and say shame. including the bully pulpit. i have heard callers talking about they are so concerned with the government coming after them. underller said i'm attack. that man is not that important at this is melodrama people are creating. people go out and want to kill and to feel more justified.

i think that is being honest with yourself. the second part is being honest with the facts. host: let's get an answer from emily miller. guest: i am not sure who he is saying is giving these threats. killobviously, if it is a crim. if a criminal says they're going to kill people -- host: some of our viewers say i'm worried about my right to bear arms. guest: i think that is totally legitimate. the president wants to ban guns with cosmetic and scary features, magazines with an arbitrary limit of 10 rounds. bills in missouri wanting to confiscatewanting to confiscate guns and a bill in washington state just got pulled that would allow law-enforcement to go into houses without violating your search and seizure rights. we sought in new york, -- saw in

new if it is a criminal. york, and it is not an exaggeration to say this is the greatest assault on the second amendment that has ever happened in this country. host: the noises that you hear coming from their range. the store is open and you hear some of the muffled shots. pedro is also out there. thei'm with earl curtis, owner of the gun shop. how did you end up owning the store? >> i wanted to get out of the i.t. business. i wanted something that was not technical. i always shotguns' so i decided to purchase it. >> what is it like being a store owner outside of washington d.c.? >> of virginia is a good state, so it is a good thing. >> when you see proposals like the president's proposal, how

does that affect you and your store? >> it makes law-abiding gun citizens and gun owners are afraid. why should they take away their rights when they are not committing any crimes? sales are up and it is a good year anyway, but it will be a better year with the tragedy in new town. >> in december, is that when they started to go up? >> yes. >> policy wise, what gets your interest most of all? >> a lot of things get my interest. we always do a background check. we have a question on the form about being mentally adjudicated. laws beforee those we add new ones that won't work.

>> the shop has been busy ever since you open. when people come in and take advantage of your store? >> people that want to practice and basically practice with their handguns. it is a great sport and we teach education, safety, and awareness. people that our training, learning how to use handguns, and enjoying the sport. host: if you could as can what was the licensing process like for him to become a gun dealer, and what kind of security does he have that the store with all those guns? questions, what kind of licensing did you have to go through and what do you do as far as security is concerned?

>> i had to apply for a federal firearms license to own the store. you have to show that you have a storefront. as far as security, we have several measures in both physical and as far as internet security to handle things around here. >> how regularly are you visited by atf? >> once a year. >> is that always consistent? >> it is. we get calls and things like that. we do our paperwork and we have also refused a lot of sales. >> the number one reason to refuse a sale? >> if guys feel uncomfortable.

we have had customers ask out to do certain things the people. >> blue ridge arsenal, mr. curtis, thank you. >host: emily miller is also out at blue ridge. monica brady said cch stands for concealed carry handgun. emily had two out of three. anything the would like to respond to? -- you would like to respond to? guest: i could not hear mr. curtis. host: patrick, you are on. emily miller is our guest. caller: i had a question about talkingof the

about limiting magazines, would that be applicable to the government? if 10 rounds is good for the average american citizen, shouldn't it be good enough for the government? guest: it is a very good point. yes, if the government thinks 10 rounds is plenty a person needs to defend themselves, it should be plenty for a law enforcement. one company said it would no longer sell firearms for that exact reason. if you think that is all you need, we are not giving them to law enforcement anyway. this ten round thing is so arbitrary. the average person has four rounds go off.

it is not based on anything scientifically. that is why new york came up with seven recently. it also makes no sense, we have criminals on the street. all you have to do is change the magazine. they will not be switching out 13-round magazines for 10-round ones. obviously. but even if they change the magazine, i can change a magazine in two seconds. it only takes the press of a button and put the new one and. it does not change how many rounds you will get off. host: family, did you bring your gun with you to blue ridge? guest: i did not, i did not realize there was a range here. i definitely would have brought

myine. will probably rent a god and be a little bit late to work. host: if you were caught with the gun in your car, what is the penalty? guest: there is a federal transport law that applies to all states. even if states have more restrictive laws, they do not supersede the federal law of transport. as long as it is not loaded between any place you can legally carry and possess. in my case, i can only legally carry an possess it in my home. as long as it is not loaded and unlocked, -- and locked, i can go to their range. if i stop to get gas or eat, i can. states like new jersey and new york have their own interpretations of it.

it is unfortunate because i have done stories of veterans illegally transporting their guns and local jurisdictions don't know the federal law and people spend the night in jail and have legal fees before it is thrown out. what the federal law is, gun owners might want to print that out with them. as long as it is not loaded and locked, you can go between places. if i were to walk outside my home and go down the street and used it for any purpose, i would face one year in jail and $1,000 fine. i might add d.c. is the most ridiculous of all their laws, your mace has to be registered for personal defense. they really have it out for

women in bc. rape and sexual assault was up 50% last year. the violation for having an unregistered mace is the same penalty as a firearm. being a woman nbc means being a sitting duck and it is a shame that the city council won't change laws. host: if you are pulled over for speeding, is it required to tell them there is a gun in the back? guest: that is a good question. if law enforcement pulls you over and says, do you have any firearms, you have the constitutional right to say nothing. that guy said, are jurisdictions where they can put you in jail for a time and get you legal fees. you can not lie. you can't say you don't, but you

have the right to remain silent. a firearms attorney i work with always recommend that to anyone. if you are pulled over, remained silent. if you are a criminal, you will not admit it anyway. criminals wil ljust lie. -- will just lie. host: are you a member of the nra? guest: i am not. i support their efforts but as a journalist, i don't think i should be part of it. host: emily is a blogger and senior opinions editor at the times. caller: good morning, c-span. morning, mis

emily. -- miss emily. i have a question for you. when i was pretty young, when we shotguns under the seat or any instance like that, we were scared. we were not raised to go to gun ranges like you were talking. that is part of the problem we are having with these schools. you are teaching kids to shoot at nine, 10 years old and i think it is wrong. i misspoke.ng -- my other thing is, the convicted felon that called a while ago was speaking out about getting guns across state lines.

i know he probably doesn't deserve one, but how does he protect himself? you said a convicted felon should not have a gun, ever. host: we have a lot on the table, what is your response to the coat caller? guest: i was just saying that as a society, convicted felons lose their constitutional right to bear arms. i just don't see that changing. it is hard pressed to know what is in the heart of a convicted felon. it is about decisions and the consequences to it. to clarify what i said about children, lots of families take their kids to the range early. they also teach them to hunt early. not encouraging families, i just don't think you should keep guns a secret. i think by doing that, you keep a curiosity.

keep your gun locked up, explained to them the basic safety. point in a safe direction. if they get curious or break into your safe, they will have all the safety things in place. ownerson the gun- line. caller: i am a mother and a grandmother. i'm a longtime member of the nra and gun owners of america. as a journalist, have you ever seen or heard the documentary "innocence betrayed" or "betrayed innocence?" guest: i have not. host: why?

caller: a man called and asked, as law-abiding citizens, you have a constitutional right to own and bear firearms and be worried about the government imposing a threat. the documentary is absolutely amazing, in that it documents with footage, fax, and truth, what has happened in the history of the civilized world when governments have gone in and confiscated firearms and the ability of individuals to protect themselves. guest: there is a long history and i would love to watch the documentary. people in this last year since i have started writing about this issue, what really hits home to

me are the people that i hear that are survivors of the holocaust, they say the first thing the nazis did, the first knock on the door was to get your guns and they never knocked again. whenever there are dictatorships, they will take your guns away from you. we can talk about self-defense and hunting, but the second amendment was written for prevention of government tyranny. that is why this objective of the obama administration to get rid of guns that came out in an internal justice department memo, the only way this complete background check system will work is if we have a registration for every gun in america and every person of america. that is the opposite of what the

founding fathers intended. host: emily miller, her blog series is called "emily gets her gun." if you would like to read the whole series, she has joined us from blue ridge arsenal. thank you for your time this morning. one more time, we will go to pedro. >> are joined by a patron of the blue ridge arsenal. how did you get in the shooting? >> i had a long time interested in shooting. i wanted to be able to keep them safe and be able to enjoy the sport. >> this is a hobby? >> it is kind of addictive. the joy of golf out the

frustrations. >> did you have -- >> there was no gun culture in my family. i did not have much exposure from that point on. in the past five years, i have worked around people that are gone friendly. -- gun friendly. i figured i would try it myself, and i did. >> do you own a gun and what type? >> id o. [inaudible] -- i do. [inaudible] >> do you have others? >> the p22, the ammunition is expensive. people seem to be hoarding ammunition. >> how often do you shoot?